Lionel Alco with Pullmor motor - upgrade options?

Well if you want to go in-depth, Lionel and the LCCA got taken to the woodshed with New Haven 'Merchants Limited' set. This was the first re-issue of the 'conventional classics' style Alco, from the rare 1958 set. It has a powered rear truck like the postwar version and later MPC ( 1970-80 ) Alco engines.  The locomotive could barely pull the set. When the add-on B unit and cars became available, forget it. The engine wheels would just spin. I have the original and LCCA re-issue sets. I placed the 1958 locomotive in front of the set and it walked away with the set. What was the problem? I found out by playing around with both sets that the Magne-traction on the LCCA re-issue was very weak compared to the originals. Cheap Chinese magnets. The way I corrected my problem was I has a spare 2 axle magne-traction truck from a broken common 218 Santa Fe Alco. It was a very easy swap of trucks as the re-issues are the same mounting as the original. Now the original and re-issue New Havens pull equal.

Operators were (are) very disappointed with this set.  If you go to Lionel's parts break down of the New Haven Alco, you will find this the only re-issue of this style of engine with the motor in the rear, all the ones fallowing are front truck drive. They have now added traction tires to the wheels along with a slightly improved Magne-Traction. The 209 NH did not have tires. I Asked Mike Regan years ago why Lionel changed from rear truck to front truck? Pulls better was his reply. Why couldn't they just make the magnets more powerful instead of changing the whole set-up? His reply was something to effect of 'That's just the way Lionel does thing now' Probably a pre-curser of Chinese manufacturing to come. (My comment).

So the OP's Alaska engines have the front truck motor with traction-tire wheels and Magne traction. Be sure the traction tires are fairly fresh and not glazed from running a lot.

So that is the story that got a lot of LCCA members back in 2009 PO'ed at Lionel for not making good on repairing the traction problem. I remember several 209 engines brought to me saying the engines were broken because they didn't pull the original passenger set.

Just a reminder I posted about using a 2028-100 f3  fm  budd motor  with fantastic pulling power heres my 4th one Im doing . I made one with traction tires  .. this one is going in a 221   version ..

It takes @ 1 hour to do one .    it runs as  and performs like any gp  or single motor f3's  etc..daniel

That may have helped, but the Alaska, and others have the motor in the front, clearance problems I'm sure.

Chuck, all I can say is I tested this twice as described, and both times I got better pulling power just by turning the engine around and running it with the motor in the rear.  So, unless proven wrong, I'll still advocate the motor in the rear if at all possible.

Lionel even got the message after a spell, check out the Vision Line Genset with the single motor in the rear.  It's an excellent puller, but I'm sure running it backwards would drop that tractive force a bunch.

Did the LCCA Burlington set (6-52528) have similar problems with the pulling power?

John.......I'm not debating or questioning your findings!

@Chuck Sartor posted:

John.......I'm not debating or questioning your findings!

I guess I don't understand then, maybe I'm reading comprehension challenged.

@Chuck Sartor posted:

The motor in front pulls better. Are you familiar with the New Haven 209 fiasco? I'm not debating that a second motor is not good, just not practical for these Alco's

Did the LCCA Burlington set (6-52528) have similar problems with the pulling power?

Chuck you got me interested in the history of the Lionel Alco and it's fascinating.  Like most Lionel products, there were many variations, including both front and rear drive.
And yes my Alaska 1200 is front Pullmor drive with both traction tires and Magne traction.  New traction tires might help and I have ordered replacements.

I'll be on the lookout for a clean late model Alco with the front Pullmor and Magne traction, to serve as donor to power my dummy, which doesn't have pickups or lighting.

Would not mine having a 2033 AA set with the die-cast frame, but I would not modify it.

@Chuck Sartor posted:

That may have helped, but the Alaska, and others have the motor in the front, clearance problems I'm sure.

Hi Chuck... I could not find a parts breakdown on Lionels replacement parts ..BUT from the picture of the alco  in question . It looks like a normal postwar style shell.. if indeed it is why not just swap chassis and use the postwar style 200 series drivetrain.. and maybe do the upgrade I done ..    daniel

I guess it would depend on how much the OP wanted the larger motor. yes your motor modification would work if the motor was rear mounted, but that would involve drilling new holes in the frame for the speaker in the front, and other modifications for the circuit boards, etc. Lionel shows on their parts list the the original rear motor cutout frame is still available from NLTW, so if the OP wanted to get the frame and rebuild the engine and use your modification, it would be very possible. Would have to get a new front truck assembly also.

Since this Alco has a front coupler, you might experiment with running it backwards. That would put the motor in the rear for you. Of course, be sure the cars roll freely, too. Who knows? It might work. If so, then a shell-swap like DanssuperO suggests would be a simple and adequate solution. Though, I would use an MPC Alco rather than a postwar 200 series: better (more rigid) drive train, die cast sideframes on the rear truck for extra weight, already has traction tires. No magnetraction, but IMHO, if you already have tires, the magnetraction is superfluous.

Well, the powered unit can push the dummy, then it would be running in reverse. Try that and see if John is correct.